Quote :

Curtis Makamson wrote :  If the object of the event (no matter how it is defined) is basically fund raising, what limitations does that present for those hosting it?

Curtis,

If you check out Mr. Schaffner's thread concerning a different way to identify events; you'll notice he uses Neshaminy as his example of a "Recreational" event. While the folks who sponsor the event are interested in the fund raising aspect of the event, I doubt that's why the majority of participants attend.

We do our best to put on a Mainstream friendly event. My joke is tents are optional, but coolers are mandatory at Neshaminy. If we do a good job promoting the event to both reenactors and  spectators, the preservations funds will follow.

It is interesting as I have read through this thread, I have begun to rethink how I would catagorize the events on my units schedule.

For example, we are doing an event this weekend where we will setup a camp and we will do some drill and such, but there will be spectators coming through to visit with us.  We will interact with them and answer their questions mostly in a 3rd person type way.  Speaking of the soldiers we are trying to represent not as them.

We won't be recreating an actual event, so it won't be a reenactment.  There won't be a firing demonstration as it will be on NPS property.  We will have civilians in the town at different areas representing different people (local farm, pastor, shop keeper..) but again, they may be in 1st or 3rd person depending on their comfort level.

I think I have just started to refer to the things I do as events.  I don't try to call them one thing or another.. if there is a battle (like AHT), then I say I am going to a reenactment, but otherwise I say I have an event or parade this weekend.  

I guess as I am growing in this hobby and thinking about what I want to get from it.. a living history to me, might be more like what I picture ATB will be like.  Immersed in the event, on the actual ground, doing what they did.  

Maybe if you look at it from the view of the spectators, a "living history" may be the fact that they are seeing something happening in front of them in real life, not in a video or still frames.  Not in a book or photos, but actually living and breathing in front of them.  

Quote :

hendrickms24 wrote :What do you think would be good ideas or a way to get organizers not to concentrate on skirmishes?

Point out to them that it's not the overtly fakey sham battle the spectators are wanting to experience, but the sight, sound and smell of the weapon being used in knowledgeable hands.

A properly conducted firing demonstration, by an individual or squad/company, is much more instructive and satisfying to spectators than some doofus "battle" on a postage stamp piece of ground requiring you to aim at the clouds.  Follow it with a hands-on session and they can't ask for much more short of joining up.

Dang Bernie, I don't think I could've said it any better.

Folks,

A heck of a lot of the shorthand for "events" in general came about as an effort to simply answer a few basic questions time and time again, such as "what kind of event is it?"

Scott McKay borrowing the term "immersion" from cultural events put a good label (I hope that word doesn't scare anyone off) on certain events, and the ratcheting back slightly by the use of "semi-immersion" brings clarity to an event descrïption.

Like Curt, I feel the term "living history" has been greatly bastardized into "lotsa camp crap and three firing demos" mostly due to the ho-hum regularity of the typical NPS driven living history. I can remember a decade and a half ago when a living history came around roughly three times each year, and the preparations (scrïpting, study, actually reading the material in the binders)were intense for a Saturday-Sunday episode of what can only be called bad reenacting theater on a living history farm site. Maybe people still do that sort of thing, but I don't see those types of events advertised as much as they once were. One of the take aways was the enjoyment of cycling through the 1860-1865 period with the same characters.

The SOYA living histories are, well, just plain boring. Wake up, drill, eat, firing demo, run into town, be back by the next firing demo, go back into town for a few brews and dinner. That pretty much sums up most of the G'burg NPS LHs these days, which is unfortunate. Some groups are bucking that trend, which is nice, and that example certainly doesn't start and stop with Mecca. Most of you have suffered through the oft-told tale of "four muskets and nineteen women, staffers, and children" enough that the saga need not be told again. Sigh.

I like mobile living histories, which is yet another label, but they have movement, cover a significant amount of ground, wow the crowds, and there are times when I do wish I had a camera.   Now that the NPS is cracking down on those style living histories at some parks, well, I'm glad we were able to enjoy as many as we did.

This is one of the more interesting threads in a while, IMHO.

After reading so many posts in this thread referring to the Battery Hooper event, how was it for those that were able to attend besides the gorgeous weather for the entire weekend?
I was enjoying this thread as I myself prefer "living history" (regardless of how many different interpretations that it has) compared to battle scenarios.